1 2026:CGHC:27335-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 3415 of 2026 Manglu Ram Netam S/o Late Luddu Ram Netam Aged About 74 Years President Godwana Samaj Smanvy Smiti Baster Sambhag, District- Kondagaon, R/o Vill And Post Bhanpur, Tehsil Farasgaon , District- Kondagaon Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Revenue And Disaster Management Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nawa Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - The Collector, District- Kondagaon Chhattisgarh 3 - The Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) Kondagaon, District- Kondagaon Chhattisgarh 4 - Executive Engineer P.W.D. (B / R), Kondagaon Division Kondagaon, District- Kondagaon Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Love Kumar Ramteke, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Shashank Thakur, Add. A.G. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal , Judge Judgment on Board Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice MANPREET KAUR Digitally signed by MANPREET KAUR Date: 2026.07.03 15:57:22 +0530 2 03.07.2026 1. Heard Mr. Love Kumar Ramteke, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. Shashank Thakur, learned Additional Advocate General for respondents / State. 2. The petitioner has filed this petition praying for following relief:- “10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call the entire records from the respondents. 10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly issue an appropriate writ to quash the work order dated 27/09/2023 (ANNEXURE-P/1). 10.3 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondents to decide the petitioner's pending representation forwarded on 02/02/2026 and the proceedings of the notice dated 10/04/2026 by passing a reasoned order within a stipulated period. 10.4 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other relief or pass such other and further orders as may be deemed fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present case in the interest of justice.” 3. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner, who is the President of the Gondwana Samaj Samanvay Samiti, District Kondagaon, seeking protection of the sacred religious and cultural site of the Gondwana Tribal Community situated over Khasra No. 626/49 (626/149), Kondagaon. The case of the petitioner is that though a portion of the land was transferred by order dated 06.06.2018 for construction of residential quarters for Judicial Officers and Employees, the respondents subsequently proposed 3 construction of a road through the petitioners’ sacred place of worship pursuant to the work order dated 27.09.2023, despite the availability of an alternative access road. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner submitted a representation to the Collector on 14.01.2026 objecting to the use of the land on the ground that it is a place of immense religious, cultural and ancestral significance for the Gondwana community. The said representation was forwarded by the Under Secretary to the Governor, Chhattisgarh, to the Revenue and Disaster Management Department on 02.02.2026 for appropriate action, which remains pending. During the pendency of the matter, the Sub-Divisional Officer, Kondagaon, issued a notice dated 10.04.2026 convening a meeting on 13.04.2026 regarding the proposed road construction. Alleging that the respondents are proceeding with the construction through the sacred religious site despite repeated objections and the existence of an alternative route, the petitioner has approached this Court seeking appropriate relief. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has approached this Court as, despite the meeting held on 13.04.2026, no decision has been taken or communicated on the objections raised by the Gondwana Tribal Community and the respondents are proceeding with the proposed road construction without deciding the petitioner’s representation dated 14.01.2026, which was forwarded by the Office of the Hon’ble Governor on 02.02.2026 for appropriate action and still remains pending. It is 4 contended that the impugned action is in complete disregard of the constitutional safeguards available to the Scheduled Tribes under the Fifth Schedule to the Constitution of India, particularly Paragraph 5, which casts a special responsibility upon the Governor in relation to the administration of Scheduled Areas. Reliance is placed on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Samatha v. State of Andhra Pradesh (1997) 8 SCC 191, wherein it was held that the constitutional scheme under the Fifth Schedule is intended to protect the land, resources, and cultural identity of the Scheduled Tribes. It is further submitted that the respondents have acted contrary to the provisions of the Panchayats (Extension to Scheduled Areas) Act, 1996, particularly Sections 4(d), 4(e) and 4(i), by proceeding with the road construction without the consent of the Gram Sabha or the Gondwana Tribal Community. Learned counsel clarifies that the petitioner has no objection to the construction of residential quarters for Judicial Officers and Employees, but is aggrieved only by the proposed road alignment passing through the sacred religious and cultural site despite the availability of an alternative route. 5. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that, pursuant to the representation submitted by the petitioner, a meeting was convened by the competent authority wherein the majority of the members of the local community expressed their no objection to the proposed construction by signing the proceedings of the 5 meeting. It is further submitted that the work order for construction had already been issued on 27.09.2023 with a stipulated completion period of 18 months, and the construction of the residential building has since been completed. Therefore, it is contended that no interference is called for in the present writ petition. 6. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents brought on record. 7. This Court is of the considered opinion that no case for interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is made out. It is not in dispute that, pursuant to the petitioner’s representation, the competent authority convened a meeting to consider the objections raised by the members of the Gondwana Tribal Community. The respondents have also submitted that the majority of the participants in the said meeting expressed their no objection to the proposed construction. Further, the work order had been issued on 27.09.2023 with a stipulated completion period of 18 months, and it has been submitted that the construction of the residential quarters has already been completed. In such circumstances, no effective relief, as prayed for, can be granted in the present petition. 8. Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed. Sd/- Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Manpreet